What is awesome in German?
in [Design]
|
Prev: Ping Bil Slowman; The global warming hoax reveiled
Next: Driver for very small brushless DC motors?
From: Stormin Mormon on 27 Nov 2009 08:14 Lock: Flintlock mechanism. Stock: wooden holder to fit your shoulder. Barrel: tube which fires the bullet It's not really common use, now that we've progressed past flintlocks. -- Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org .. "Rich Grise" <richgrise(a)example.net> wrote in message news:pan.2009.11.25.17.26.45.712490(a)example.net... Yikes! I'm 60 freakin' years old, and I swear, as Goddess is my witness, that this is the first time in my life I realized that this refers to a gun! All my life, I've assumed that it had something to do with shipping, meaning "a full load of cargo." "Stock" - well, compare "stockroom", and "barrel", well, that's a container with staves, used for shipping all manner of stuff. The "Lock" part, I simply assumed was something I didn't know about, maybe the padlock on a treasure chest or something. Thanks, Rich
From: Tim Wescott on 27 Nov 2009 11:57 On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 09:27:00 -0800, Rich Grise wrote: > On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 05:46:25 -0800, Rune Allnor wrote: >> >> If you have seen the movie "lock, stock and two smoking barrels" you >> know what I mean. The dialogue in that film might look good in text, >> but just sounds awkward, construed and stylized in the flesh. > > Yikes! I'm 60 freakin' years old, and I swear, as Goddess is my witness, > that this is the first time in my life I realized that this refers to a > gun! All my life, I've assumed that it had something to do with > shipping, meaning "a full load of cargo." > > "Stock" - well, compare "stockroom", and "barrel", well, that's a > container with staves, used for shipping all manner of stuff. The "Lock" > part, I simply assumed was something I didn't know about, maybe the > padlock on a treasure chest or something. You're 60 freakin' years old and still have opportunities to stretch those old brain cells! I knew what it meant whenever I thought hard about it, but for the most part it's just another cliché rattling around in the old brain pan. (We need _new_ metaphors to replace these old clichés that you have to be a historian to understand their meaning. How many kids these days -- even ones that shoot -- are going to 'get' "lock, stock and barrel"?) -- www.wescottdesign.com
From: Tim Wescott on 27 Nov 2009 12:00 On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 09:27:00 -0800, Rich Grise wrote: > On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 05:46:25 -0800, Rune Allnor wrote: >> >> If you have seen the movie "lock, stock and two smoking barrels" you >> know what I mean. The dialogue in that film might look good in text, >> but just sounds awkward, construed and stylized in the flesh. > > Yikes! I'm 60 freakin' years old, and I swear, as Goddess is my witness, > that this is the first time in my life I realized that this refers to a > gun! All my life, I've assumed that it had something to do with > shipping, meaning "a full load of cargo." > > "Stock" - well, compare "stockroom", and "barrel", well, that's a > container with staves, used for shipping all manner of stuff. The "Lock" > part, I simply assumed was something I didn't know about, maybe the > padlock on a treasure chest or something. > > Thanks, > Rich And talking about clichés, Wikipedia has this quote from Salvidore Dalí: "The first man to compare the flabby cheeks of a young woman to a rose was obviously a poet; the first to repeat it was possibly an idiot." -- www.wescottdesign.com
From: Tim Wescott on 27 Nov 2009 12:03 On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 14:17:46 -0800, Rune Allnor wrote: > On 25 Nov, 21:46, Tauno Voipio <tauno.voi...(a)notused.fi.invalid> wrote: >> Rune Allnor wrote: > >> >> For me, with Swedish as second native language, Norwegian sounds >> >> like funny Swedish, >> >> > *Formal* Norwegian (highly influenced by the dialects in the >> > south-east central area, near Oslo) sounds like Donald Duck on >> > helium. People with that kind of native dialect would struggle very >> > hard to be taken seriously while speaking any non-native language. >> >> > My native dialect seems to be a somewhat better staring point for >> > speaking English, and particularly Italian. >> >> Bokmål / nynorsk? > > Those are the two *written* forms of Norwegian: Bokmål (litteraly "the > language of/from the books") was based on the Danish written language > established by the Danish government during the "400-year night", when > Norway was a subsidiary to the Danish crown between ~1380 and 1814. The > civil servants had all been trained in Denmark, and wrote Danish > fluently, so the obvious thing to do was to keep business as usual. > > Since then the 'official' written Norwegian language was dominated by > the heritage from the Danish civil service. To this day, some 200 years > later, it is very little difference between written Norwegian Bokmål and > written Danish. A non-native speaker of both the two languages would > need to know what to look for, to see the difference. > > However, bokmål is strictly a written language. Some people *claim* to > speak bokmål, but in reality only speaks a normalized dialect that is > the closest to the written language, but still far enough away that they > are two different forms. > > In the nationalromantic era that followed the 1814 emancipation from the > Danes there was a movement to establish a home-grown Norwegian written > language, to replace the heritage from the Danes. > > The idea was to compensate for the Danish influence, represented by the > civil service and the urban establishment, by basing the new written > language on the rural spoken dialects. Unfortunately, there was an > over-compensation, in that the person in charge, Ivar Aasen, went to the > furthest, most remote valleys he could possibly reach with 1820-30s > communications. > > So he ended up doubly alienating his intended audience, partially by > using the most obscure rural non-Danish forms he could possibly find; > partially by restricting his data to the areas near the south-east > central, leaving a lot of the more remote areas, particularly around the > coast, uncatered for. > > Lots of people who might have been positive to the efforts were > alienated by this over-compensation, leaving the population in two > entrenched camps, fiercly disagreeing with each other. After a lot of > hubbub, this written language has now become what is known as "nynorsk", > "New Norwegian". > > Repercussions of the ancient battles are stil raging, as kids think > nynorsk (which in these days is based on an average of the spoken > Norwegian dialects) is "grautmål", "porrage language", while they at the > same time are battling with the not at all insignificant (well, all out > irrational) quirks, twists and turns associated with making an artifical > written language match up with their spoken languages. > > As for myself, I speak a normalized (probably more so than I am aware) > form of a northern dialect, that matches quite nicely with the present > norm of nynorsk. (Not that it matters: I still write bokmål, as does > some 80-90% of the population.) My dialect is non-typical Norwegian in > that the 'melody' (prosidy?) matches quite well with both English (well, > at least compared to most Norwegian dialects). > > Many years ago I stayed a few months in Italy, with another Norwegian > who spoke one of the dominant Norwegian dialects. People who heard us > talk among ourselfs could not understand how we could possibly be > talking the same language. During that stay I learned that the > melody/prosidy my non-normalized Norwegian dialect is particularly well > matched up with the Italian langauge. > > Rune So what happens if someone just tries to write in their own dialect -- I assume that one would have to come up with spellings on one's own, at least to some extent. Would this be greeted with joy as being sincere/nationalistic/avant- guard, or would it be considered hackneyed? How does a writer render dialog? -- www.wescottdesign.com
From: Jim Wilkins on 27 Nov 2009 12:18
On Nov 27, 12:03 pm, Tim Wescott <t...(a)seemywebsite.com> wrote: > On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 14:17:46 -0800, Rune Allnor wrote: > > On 25 Nov, 21:46, Tauno Voipio <tauno.voi...(a)notused.fi.invalid> wrote: > >> Rune Allnor wrote: > > >> >> For me, with Swedish as second native language, Norwegian sounds > >> >> like funny Swedish, > > >> > *Formal* Norwegian (highly influenced by the dialects in the > >> > south-east central area, near Oslo) sounds like Donald Duck on > >> > helium. People with that kind of native dialect would struggle very > >> > hard to be taken seriously while speaking any non-native language. > > >> > My native dialect seems to be a somewhat better staring point for > >> > speaking English, and particularly Italian. > > >> Bokmål / nynorsk? > > > Those are the two *written* forms of Norwegian: Bokmål (litteraly "the > > language of/from the books") was based on the Danish written language > > established by the Danish government during the "400-year night", when > > Norway was a subsidiary to the Danish crown between ~1380 and 1814. The > > civil servants had all been trained in Denmark, and wrote Danish > > fluently, so the obvious thing to do was to keep business as usual. > > > Since then the 'official' written Norwegian language was dominated by > > the heritage from the Danish civil service. To this day, some 200 years > > later, it is very little difference between written Norwegian Bokmål and > > written Danish. A non-native speaker of both the two languages would > > need to know what to look for, to see the difference. > > > However, bokmål is strictly a written language. Some people *claim* to > > speak bokmål, but in reality only speaks a normalized dialect that is > > the closest to the written language, but still far enough away that they > > are two different forms. > > > In the nationalromantic era that followed the 1814 emancipation from the > > Danes there was a movement to establish a home-grown Norwegian written > > language, to replace the heritage from the Danes. > > > The idea was to compensate for the Danish influence, represented by the > > civil service and the urban establishment, by basing the new written > > language on the rural spoken dialects. Unfortunately, there was an > > over-compensation, in that the person in charge, Ivar Aasen, went to the > > furthest, most remote valleys he could possibly reach with 1820-30s > > communications. > > > So he ended up doubly alienating his intended audience, partially by > > using the most obscure rural non-Danish forms he could possibly find; > > partially by restricting his data to the areas near the south-east > > central, leaving a lot of the more remote areas, particularly around the > > coast, uncatered for. > > > Lots of people who might have been positive to the efforts were > > alienated by this over-compensation, leaving the population in two > > entrenched camps, fiercly disagreeing with each other. After a lot of > > hubbub, this written language has now become what is known as "nynorsk", > > "New Norwegian". > > > Repercussions of the ancient battles are stil raging, as kids think > > nynorsk (which in these days is based on an average of the spoken > > Norwegian dialects) is "grautmål", "porrage language", while they at the > > same time are battling with the not at all insignificant (well, all out > > irrational) quirks, twists and turns associated with making an artifical > > written language match up with their spoken languages. > > > As for myself, I speak a normalized (probably more so than I am aware) > > form of a northern dialect, that matches quite nicely with the present > > norm of nynorsk. (Not that it matters: I still write bokmål, as does > > some 80-90% of the population.) My dialect is non-typical Norwegian in > > that the 'melody' (prosidy?) matches quite well with both English (well, > > at least compared to most Norwegian dialects). > > > Many years ago I stayed a few months in Italy, with another Norwegian > > who spoke one of the dominant Norwegian dialects. People who heard us > > talk among ourselfs could not understand how we could possibly be > > talking the same language. During that stay I learned that the > > melody/prosidy my non-normalized Norwegian dialect is particularly well > > matched up with the Italian langauge. > > > Rune > > So what happens if someone just tries to write in their own dialect -- I > assume that one would have to come up with spellings on one's own, at > least to some extent. > > Would this be greeted with joy as being sincere/nationalistic/avant- > guard, or would it be considered hackneyed? > > How does a writer render dialog? > > --www.wescottdesign.com Read William Faulkner. Yiddish spelling is a good example of phonetic German dialect. jsw |